Friday, July 12, 2019

“For all these reasons, gentlemen, I say, let the women govern the city! Don’t start analysing and debating it all, trying to be convinced by the argument. Just hand it over to them. We need only to consider the following: Being the mothers of our soldiers, they’d want to protect them as best they can; and … and think how much bigger the rations would be and how much faster they’d reach our soldiers when they’re fighting! Then, so far as the treasury is concerned, women know all about money. They’ve learnt the game a long time ago. A woman will never be diddled by anyone if she’s the leader — women are the absolute masters at diddling!”

Acouple of months ago I read Assemblywomen by Aristophanes. For those of you not in the know, Aristophanes is pretty much the LITERAL father of comedy, whose plays The Knights, Wasps and Peace are among the oldest surviving comedies ever written — we’re talking 400 BC here, folks.

Perhaps Aristophanes most popular work is Lysistrata, a satire about a buncha’ wives getting together and ending the Pelopennisian War by refusing to fuck their soldier husbands anymore. But in terms of modern import, I think it’s safe to say Assemblywomen is the far more pertinent work.

Penned in 391 BC, Assemblywomen is basically Hamburger: The Motion Picturein Athenian form. Not only does half the play revolve around a guy taking a more painful shit than normal out in the middle of a field at 3 in the morning, the other half is a “parody” in which all the women in town dress in drag, take over Congress and immediately start establishing a communist utopia in which all private wealth is abolished, the local courthouses are demolished and turned into bureaucratic buffet lines and citizens are literally barred from living in homes with walls. Eventually, the power-hungry assemblywomen pass an edict forcing the men in the town to have sex with them whenever they demand it, but only after they bump uglies with the oldest and ugliest women in the community first, because — obviously — that’s the only equitable way to do things from an double-X chromosomal perspective.

Keep in mind, folks, the term communism itself wouldn’t be invented for another 2,200 years when Aristophanes penned his comedy. Yet he nonetheless managed to paint a more than vivid depiction of a female-led, Marxist government two goddamn millennia before Marx was even born. Which leads me to think one of two things are at play here. Either, a.) Aristophanes was a secret time-traveler who wanted to give us a warning about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez WAY in advance, or b.) the very notion of communism itself is so ingrained in the female subconscious that perhaps it’s impossible to describe the doctrine as anything other than an immutable feminine impulse.

It’s no secret that women abhor competition — at least, when it comes to economics. I’ve worked in all-male settings and I’ve worked in all-female settings, and the workplace attitudes are totally opposite. In the all-male workplace, there’s nonstop competition concerning the actual work that goes on — everybody wants to do a better job than everyone else, and there’s definitely an implicit desire to be more productive or create a better finished product than your cohorts. But all of that shit stops as soon as you come off the clock; at that point, you and your fellow workers become a cooperative unit when it comes to day to day life outside of the office. You need me to bring my pickup truck over to your place to help you move some furniture or need me to spot you a $50 over the weekend ‘til you get paid again? No problem, bud, ‘cause I know you’d do the same for me.

But in the all-women workplace, it’s the complete antithesis. There, the women all work together — if not flatout conspire and collude — on each others’ work so that no one person can really take the blame if anyone of them fucks up on the job. There is absolutely NO impetus to outperform expectations, since the inherent “coordinative” atmosphere ensures the quo remains forever static. Basically, it’s everybody teaming up to get as little work achieved as humanly possible, with nobody attempting to do more than they’re expected to. But outside of work, though, those bitches are competitive as hell. They WANT their coworkers to falter in life, and there’s nothing they’d love more than to see their peers get divorced or contract an STD or develop a cocaine addiction. The moment one female worker thinks another female worker is doing “better” than she is — she gets a better looking boyfriend, her kids are doing better at school than her kids, she’s got a better personal massager than she does — she immediately starts hatching a plan to make her pay. They might be all buddy-buddy around the water cooler, but deep down they all hate each others’ guts and can’t wait to see the others fail, falter and generally fuck up in life as much as humanly possible.

And in that, you can understand why the female mind has a natural tendency to align with communist idealism. After all, communism is an economic system in which no one really has any responsibility for their own actions and outcomes, and the very idea of competition for monetary gain and other resources is considered heretical. Ultimately, women love communism because it’s the only kind of economic system that prevents them from flat out failing financially across the board. Since no one is legally allowed to take the economic initiative and TRY to do better than anyone else under such a system, that means they can just continue to languish and spend minimum effort on their professional sojourns yet still reap maximum benefits.

And communism also aspires to that other lofty feminist ideal — communal misery. Capitalism ensures that those who make the concentrated effort and study the system succeed and everybody who doesn’t winds up working at Arby’s or a warehouse where guys named Cletus and Deangelo shoot up meth in the bathroom and still get paid $15 an hour thanks to their union membership. But communism guarantees the economic photonegative — a situation in which those who do the least amount of work and take the least amount of initiative thrive due to government subsidies and those who try to make a better life for themselves are exiled to the gulags and made into examples. Technically, in a communist society nobody fails because NOBODY succeeds economically; sure, everybody is poor as fuck and has to rely on a massive totalitarian state for everything, but at least the poverty is distributed EQUALLY and FAIRLY to all, right?

Deep down, women know they can’t compete with men. This is a biological, academic, economic and cognitive truth.

The United States’ Womens’ National Soccer Team might be the best female footy squad on the planet, but they still got their asses kicked 5-2 … by a 15-and-under boys’ team.

And it’s definitely why men post higher IQ scores than women across the board. Aye, 13 people on the planet (as of 2015) had recorded IQs over 176 — and, as a mere genetic aside, all of them just so happened to have ding-dongs and ballsacks.

Yes, that old canard about mass generalizations still apply, and it remains a best practice to take this stuff on a person by person basis. But on the macro-level, at least, it’s quite clear that women just don’t have the genetic batter to thrive and survive in an economic ecosphere where the smartest and toughest reap the spoils. If we indeed lived in a true meritocracy — where the ONLY thing that dictated one’s occupational position was core talent, ability and dedication to the job — the scope of women’s collective power would be limited to douche factories and homemade snack cake blogs.

Which, again, makes the allure of communism so appealing for the womenfolk. They can’t win in a fair, competitive marketplace, so what’s the solution? Duh — implement an socialist form of government that literally CONTROLS all forms of commerce and places people in economic predicaments based not on their talents, skills and capabilities, but to meet wholly arbitrary “diversity” requirements, in which totally superficial and utterly irrelevant characteristics determine who gets what (and how much) instead of silly objective criteria like “quality of work” or “ability to exceed production mandates.”

Of course, women — especially those strong-willed “feminist” types — will never come right out and SAY that we need socialism because they’re inherently worse at men when it comes to professional endeavors. Rather, they try to cloak their commie idealism by masking it with allegations of “sexism” or “muh patriarchy” — these loud, emotionally-based screechings that earnestly have no rooting in reality, but when said frequently and loudly enough by large volumes of people, comes to resemble a pseudo-populist weltanschauung that, however unreasonable and illogical, becomes impossible to counteract due to its political intensity. As the #MeToo movement has clearly demonstrated, pretty much the only way women can achieve “parity” with men in a capitalist society is to repeatedly accuse them of raping them or staring at their tits at boardroom meetings — a blatant wealth-redistribution tactic that gives women a clear-cut financial incentive to seek out victimization in all its facets … even if said “victimization” has to be totally fabricated.

Which brings me to the focal point of this whole long-ass, rambling spiel: if you want to kill a good thing deader than Elvis, all you have to do is inject it with women and just wait for the walls to start crumbling down.

Back in the 1990s, most of my pop cultural passions — video games, horror movies, comics, pro wrestling, etc. — were virtually male-exclusive fandoms. Indeed, the Sega Saturn, Chud II: Bud The Chud, SCUD: The Disposable Assassin back issues and Mick Foley matches were pretty much woman repellant — not only did such sociocultural sectors repel women, even having a base interest in such things made you about as desirable to the female form as a pap smear from Edward Scissorhands. But that was to our benefit, since the lack of female influence kept our most sacred pop cultural institutions free of gender-politics bullshit. Rather, it gave us a boys club to discuss the technical merit and objective quality of our favorite media texts — i.e., a forum to discuss our mutual interests WITHOUT the unwanted intrusion of, sigh, socially relevant banter.

But then, something happened around the mid-to-late 2000s. All of a sudden, these previously women-free domains started getting inundated by “fans” who, apparently, just sprouted up in the middle of the night. Initially, I think was a movement borne of pure egotism. I mean, go to any anime or horror convention and take stock of the women you’ll see there — in everyday life, most of these hoes wouldn’t score anything higher than a four, maybe a five, so I think it’s safe to say they don’t get too much attention from “real” males when they’re out and about in the public sphere. But by dressing up like cartoon skanks, however, they automatically gain some semblance of sex appeal, even if said sex appeal is relegated to fringe culture fetishism. But hey, attention IS attention, even if it is from some hideous beta male, and since such spheres are literally the only pockets of capitalistic culture where their bodies do have some sort of social currency, of course they would flock to these sorts of things en masse.

But naturally, what happens is that these fandoms get a little too crowded and a few too many women embed themselves in the culture. And since scarcity creates value, the more hoochies that are involved in such niche hobbyist hellholes, the more — ding ding — COMPETITION that arises in the marketplace. And since women loathe competing against one another in domains where the fair, impartial hand of the market is the sole determinant of who thrives and who falters, it’s only a matter of time until — you guessed it — the economically/socially undesirable “fan girls” join forces to politick their way into positions of power.

This happens every friggin’ time, without fail. As Aristophanes pointed out two millennia ago, the intrinsic nature of women is to trend towards uber-collectivism, but at the same time, they desire utmost attention on the individual level. So you take a raging lady-boner for mass communalism and inject it with a nearly lethal level of egotistical estrogen, and what does that do to your fandom structure? That’s right, it brings the whole tentpole collapsing to the ground, leaving the faithful with this almost churchlike, hierarchical “planned community” where nobody is allowed to have fun and the technical merits of the objectified realm (be it comics, wrestling, horror, what have you) becomes nothing more than another vessel to carry along the immortal strain of vaginal communism tendency.

Really, at this point, the only thing you can do is try to pinpoint hobbies that are so technically-oriented and meritocracy-based that females shy away from them like Dracula gawking at a crucifix. You know, something inherently masculine and capitalistic, that revolves around a lot of machinery and physical toil, like working on cars or building guns and shit. Or something really labor-intensive with a lot of numbers where attention to detail is necessary, like computer programming or coding. Or something that inherently highlights the biological and cerebral differentiation points betwixt the sexes, like bare knuckle boxing, competitive industrial engineering or, my personal favorite, waging full scale total war on opposing peoples.

Alas, it looks like the ONLY fandoms that are totally free from the taint of toxic feminism are sectors such as VCR repair, lawn care and dipping Skoal. Aye, perhaps the only way to avoid the slow creep of gyno-communism is to remove one’s self from the false song of both pop culture and modernity herself.

And with that in mind, I am immediately reminded of the sage advice of one William S. Burroughs: “Find yourself in a matriarchy? Walk — don’t run — to the nearest frontier.”

0
comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

Greetings, Intraweb travelers! My name is Jimbo X (an unusual surname, I know...I think it's Greenlandic) and I'm your kindly proprietor of IIIA. You're probably wondering what the intent of this site is, so that makes two of us. I suppose it's an info-dump for all of the stuff that I find fascinating/irksome about American culture and society, so you'll find a nice jumble of high culture snobbery and low culture sleaze here. It's also a place for me to rant, rave and ramble about all sorts of things that matter and don't matter, so prepare yourself for some heavy-handed bloviating about politics and consumption. Well, that, and lots of stuff about video games and junk food. The things that matter the most obviously.